Tag Archives: reform

A key change in the UK’s housing market over the past twenty years has been the growth of the private rented sector (PRS), with more living in the sector than ever before. This growth has led to the view that there is now a ‘generation rent’ who are priced out of home ownership and stranded in insecure short-term lets for prolonged periods of their lives – fuelling concerns about intergenerational inequality.

The UK 2011 Census highlighted that 40% of private renters were young people under the age of 35. With a challenging labour market, rising student debt and welfare reforms, home ownership and social housing is increasingly out of reach for these young people, who end up stuck private renting for much longer than the previous generation.

It was noted by Dr McKee that there is a clear age dimension to the recent shifts in housing tenure, but that the ‘generation rent’ label is more complex than portrayed. Income and family support were emphasised as just as critical in the understanding of young people’s experiences and future plans, as was geography.

Indeed, other research has highlighted that income and family background have a huge impact on young people’s housing market experiences. The Resolution Foundation’s recent report highlights that young people from wealthier families are more likely to become homeowners, suggesting that there are also intra-generational inequalities.

Dr McKee’s study focused on the inequalities facing these young people through qualitative research with 16 young people aged 35 and under living in the PRS in Scotland or England. Those on low incomes were explicitly targeted with the aim of giving them a voice, which was considered to be largely absent in previous research.

Aspirations vs expectations

There was a long-term aspiration for home ownership among the majority of participants, with a smaller number aspiring to social housing. But private renting was seen as the only short-term option as a host of challenges thwart them from realising their ambitions:

mortgage finance

family support

labour markets

student debt

welfare reform

The fact that housing tenure was highlighted by respondents rather than housing type or location, as previous research has highlighted, suggests there is a general dissatisfaction with living in the PRS. Indeed, it was noted that the PRS was discussed largely negatively, perceived as the ‘tenure of last resort’.

Despite the continued aspirations for home ownership, there was a marked difference between aspirations and expectations. There was a levelling down of expectations to own and a gap emerging between what the young people aspired to as their ideal and what they expected to achieve. A small minority even remarked that a more realistic goal may in fact be improvements in the PRS. The study showed that such expectations were due, mainly, to low earnings and insecure employment, combined with a lack of family financial support.

While the short-term nature of private renting makes it a very flexible rental option, it also makes it insecure and precarious, creating barriers for tenants who want to settle into a home and community. This is particularly worrying for families with children, who can be greatly affected by the upheaval of having to regularly move.

Emotional impacts

The study was particularly interested in the more intangible and emotional impacts on ‘generation rent’ and how the frustrations in realising their aspirations impacted negatively on their wellbeing.

It was stressed that issues in the PRS are having serious negative impacts on the wellbeing of young people – insecure, expensive and poor quality housing are contributing to depression, stress and anxiety. Moreover, for those on the lowest incomes, such issues are even contributing to homelessness.

Not only is mental wellbeing affected but their physical health has also been impacted by poor quality housing. Problems with rodents, damp and mould, broken white goods and poor quality accommodation in general were all reported by participants.

The experiences of the young people in the study were described as a “sad reflection of housing in the UK today” and raises questions over whether the PRS can really meet the needs of low income groups in particular.

Geography matters

Another key finding was that where people live really matters, not only because of the spatial nature of housing and labour markets, but also as tenancy rights and regulations vary across the UK.

Recent reforms in Scotland have provided tenants with greater security of tenure and more predictable rent increases. England was highlighted as lagging behind the rest of the UK in terms of regulation and tenants’ rights as it lacks any national landlord registration scheme. Letting agent fees in England were also highlighted as a real issue in relation to affordability.

It was suggested that the rest of the UK could learn much from the Scottish experience, although there is a need to go further, particularly in relation to affordability.

Way forward

A key message from the study was that security of tenure really matters for those living in the PRS but reform of the housing system can only go so far. Participants identified more affordable housing, more protection for renters and income inequalities as areas where the government could intervene to improve things.

Based on the findings, six key policy recommendations were made:

ensure security of tenure;

take action on rents;

provide better education for tenants on their rights, and indeed for landlords;

provide more affordable housing; and

ensure greater understanding of intra-generational inequalities.

If the wider inequalities within society are also addressed, perhaps the PRS could become an aspiration rather than the ‘tenure of last resort’.

Co-production in criminal justice was the core theme of a conference held last Wednesday by the Scottish Co-Production Network.

The speakers were invited to showcase their organisations as three examples of best practice. All the organisations have integrating partnerships and co-production at the heart of their values, and they spoke of the benefits and challenges they had faced, as three very different organisations, all looking to use co-production in the context of criminal justice.

Startup Stock Photos

Supporting vulnerable women

Tomorrow’s Women Glasgow, is part of a national pilot which aims to develop community- based justice options for people who are offenders. This specific pilot focuses on vulnerable women with complex needs who are in, or have recently been involved in, the criminal justice system.

The women-only centre offers a safe space for women to come and spend time and to work with mentors to address the barriers and issues which prevent them from leading positive, healthy lives. In addition to this, the women are invited to contribute ideas towards the running of the centre, planning activities, contributing to a newsletter and hosting open days.

“The scheme gives vulnerable women a choice, a voice, a direction and opportunities”

The project is run in association with the social enterprise Outside the Box. There are some examples of Outside the Box’s other projects here.

Improving transitions from prison

Pete from Positive Prison? Positive Futures… delivered an inspiring and thought-provoking presentation about his experiences as a person with a conviction who had served time in prison and how that drove him to help others upon their release from prison. He helped to set up the organisation Positive Prison? Positive Futures… (PP?PF) which seeks to “improve the effectiveness of Scotland’s criminal justice system so as to reduce the harms caused by crime and to support the reintegration of those who are or have been subject to punishment”.

He was keen to stress that the charity is not a service provider; rather it is an initial point of contact to help direct people with convictions to the available and relevant services which already exist.

“We’re kind of like in space when you use the gravitational pull of an object to slingshot you in the right direction (Apollo 13 reference anyone?!). People are coming to us going one way, we come into contact with them, build their speed and send them in another, safer, hopefully better direction!”

In addition to this, the charity engages regularly with the Scottish Government as part of committees looking into reform of the prison service, the redesign of community justice and have, among other things, influenced policy decisions around the release of individuals from prison including transitional care.

The charity works with recently released, or soon to be released people with convictions, looking at building relationships during the vulnerable first few weeks ‘on the outside’ where re-offending and suicide rates are high. They also offer mentoring to help prepare people for the transition from prison life.

Co-production and young people

Space Unlimited is a social enterprise based in Glasgow, which offers a creative space for young people to become involved in the planning and review of the criminal youth justice system. It encourages young people from vulnerable backgrounds, as well as young people who have served time in prison, to use their experiences to change how offending and criminal justice is viewed by young people.

The scheme aims to provide a space to show how young people can use their views to influence how the system can work best for them, to avoid re-offending and help integrate them back into society. The young people interact with adult stakeholders from across the local authority and criminal justice sector, as well as charities and third sector organisations.

“We promote and encourage children and young people to view themselves as experts in their own right, using their own experiences to promote positive change in the youth criminal justice system”

Creating new spaces for dialogue

What all of the case studies sought to highlight were the key elements of co-production:

Assets

Capacity

Mutuality

Networks

Shared roles

Catalysts

The speakers discussed their learning and experiences, as well as the challenges they face, but all highlighted the fundamental belief underpinning co-production – that service users and service providers can learn from one another. We create better services by engaging service users – creating services with people, not for them.

Co-production is an approach which is widely spoken about in health and social care, but as the conference and its speakers highlighted, the application and remit of co-production could be rolled out over other areas of policy too. It is all about finding groups of people willing to engage and to listen – creating a space for an exchange of dialogue, knowledge and learning. And the results could potentially be hugely beneficial for both service users and service providers. This video from the New Economics Foundation (NEF) highlights some of the benefits of co-production in practice.

Co-producing Positive Futures learning event: how co-production, learning and partnership building can improve community experiences and engage people in the criminal justice system. Scottish Co-production Network, Glasgow, 28 October 2015.

In April 2011, the Government Digital Service (GDS) was launched to lead the digital transformation of government. The focus was on making public services digital by default (a policy which envisions most public services being delivered online), and simpler, clearer and faster to use.

Their first major project was the development of GOV.UK. It was to act as the primary source for UK government data and would replace a number of existing websites, including DirectGov. Overall, GOV.UK has been viewed as a GDS success story.

One noted failure was the transition of the Home Office visa and immigration site to GOV.UK. According to their own analysis, the GDS did not have a good enough understanding of the users’ needs.

GDS in turmoil?

At the beginning of August 2015, Executive Director of the GDS Mike Bracken announced he was leaving. In an interview, Mike Bracken explained that he was leaving due to the “stresses and strains” of the role. The current GDS Chief Operating Officer Stephen Foreshew-Cain will move up and replace him.

There have also been a number of other senior GDS leaders departing. These include:

Deputy Director Tom Loosemore

Director of Strategy Russell Davies

Director of Design Ben Terrett

Head of User Research Leisa Reichelt

Transformation Programme Director of the Government Digital Service Michael Beaven.

These changes have led to speculation about the future of the GDS. Last financial year, the service had a budget of £58 million and approximately 700 members of staff. Computerworld have suggested that the GDS could undergo substantial cuts as part of the HM Treasury’s spending review. If so, the impact could fundamentally change the GDS’ role.

The future

In August, Matt Hancock MP, Minister for the Cabinet Office, reiterated his support for the GDS. He said:

“the work that GDS is doing, and the vision of Government as a Platform, is changing the core infrastructure of shared digital systems, technology and processes.”

The Minister then went on to emphasise that the GDS has extremely talented people and has a lot more to contribute in the future.

In addition, Eddie Copeland, Head of Technology Policy at the Policy Exchange has outlined 5 points of focus for the ‘next phase’ of the GDS. These include:

Be guardian of the rules – the government should lead the way in defining the standards of how front-end government IT should work, although should not be concerned about who provides it, whether that’s public or private sector.

Focus on the user / citizen experience – the government should focus on providing a positive customer experience and creating online transactions that are needed.

Lead on open standards for data – the use of open standards would reduce the technical barriers to sharing information between different systems.

Be an informed customer – failed IT projects were often the fault of the government, therefore the government needs to become a smarter, more demanding customer.

Scale best practice – all departments should learn from the successes of the GDS, and try to implement innovative solutions where possible.

Final thoughts

It’s likely that the GDS will play an important role in the continued digital transformation of government services. However, some – including Eddie Copeland – believe that the GDS will become a smaller organisation. As a result, there may be opportunities for the private sector to get involved in supporting the digital transformation, particularly if they can provide a solid business case.

Follow us on Twitter to see what developments in public and social policy are interesting our research team.

The public sector in the UK is currently experiencing unprecedented levels of change. Increased demand and budget cuts have resulted in large-scale transformation programmes. Change has become a constant feature of the landscape, and being able to effectively implement, manage and sustain that change is fast becoming a requisite skill for public sector managers at all levels of the organisational hierarchy – not just a job for those ‘at the top’.

However, despite the increased prevalence of change management initiatives, research has shown as many as 75% of organisations fail to sustain their change initiatives over time. Poorly prepared and trained managers were found to be a key factor behind the high failure rate.

In our latest briefing, we look at ‘what works’ when implementing change initiatives, drawing on key pieces of research and the advice of prominent change management experts.

We provide an overview of the different types of change that may be experienced, set out a step-by-step framework for introducing, managing and sustaining change in your organisation, and highlight the common features of successful change management initiatives. We also look at some of the most common reasons for the failure of change initiatives, and how these can be avoided and/or addressed.

The legislative framework for adult social care in England has been described as out-dated by the Department of Health (DH) as it is focused on crisis intervention rather than prevention and early intervention, and on the provision of services, rather than enabling the system to be centred around the health and wellbeing of people and carers. The DH has therefore highlighted the need for government intervention to reform the legal framework so it better fits the purpose of modern care and support.

The government’s objectives for adult social care are to improve people’s quality of life, delay and reduce the need for care, ensure positive care experiences and safeguard adults from harm. The Care Act 2014 was passed into law on 14th May 2014 with the aim of transforming adult social care in England to meet these objectives. Although the Act is generally concerned with care and support matters in England, some provisions extend to the devolved nations. The main focus of the Act is on promoting individual wellbeing and preventing the need for care and support. In particular, it makes provision:

to reform the law relating to care and support for adults and the law relating to support for carers;

about safeguarding adults from abuse or neglect;

about care standards;

about Health Education England;

about the Health Research Authority;

about integrating care and support with health services; and

for connected purposes.

According to Care and Support Minister, Norman Lamb: “the Care Act represents the most significant reform of care and support in more than 60 years, putting people and their carers in control of their care and support. For the first time, the Act will put a limit on the amount anyone will have to pay towards the costs of their care.”

Due to come into force in April 2015, with its provisions related to funding reform to be implemented a year later, the success, or otherwise, of the Care Act’s implementation is as yet unknown.

Nevertheless, there has been much discussion over the potential issues and challenges with regard to implementation. The College of Social Work (TCSW) argues that the implementation of the legislative reforms “will be challenging and demand significant cultural and attitudinal changes, both strategically and in professional practice”.

The Act presents significant changes for local authorities which will be challenging to implement in the proposed timescale. Concerns have been raised by both local authorities and charities over the funding of the Act’s provisions and the sustainability of adult social care services. A recent article published in Community Care highlights such concerns among councils, noting that nine out of 10 councils believe key parts of the Act will be jeopardised if the government fails to provide local authorities with adequate funding for implementing the reforms.

According to London Councils, London is facing double the shortfall in funding to prepare for the Care Act than previously thought with proposed new funding arrangements unveiled by the government to leave the capital with a £36 million gap.

Moreover, a subsequent article in Community Care suggests that local authorities need to consider the training challenge now in order to negotiate the issues raised by the new funding reforms.

The main costs of the Act relate to improved legal rights for carers (rising to £175 million per annum). However, there may be additional costs, for example where local authorities face increased demand for services due to improved information. Greater clarification on the support available to carers could potentially increase the workload for social care professionals as the number of carers’ assessments could also increase.

The additional requirements of providing support to self-funders as well as carers could also take its toll on councils. Caroline May, business partner in finance at Havering LBC noted at a recent roundtable that:

“There are a lot of unknowns out there that will present us with financial challenges. I think culture shift is going to be huge across the board.”

The Association of Directors of Adult Social Care (ADASS), which represents local authorities, is unconvinced that local authorities can implement the changes required in the proposed timescale. In a joint report with the Local Government Association, they highlight the financial challenges local authorities face, particularly at a time of budget cuts and increasing demand for services. A recent inquiry into adult social care in England has highlighted that there was an 8% real terms cut in spending between 2010/11 and 2012/13; and demand for care provided by adults is projected to rise by over 50% between 2007 and 2032, while the supply of this care is projected to rise by only 20%, according to Carers UK.

Despite these funding issues, however, cost savings have also been identified in relation to public expenditure savings of improved support for carers, according to the DH’s recent impact assessment, which also states that these cost savings outweigh other new costs overall. The potential benefits of the Act for people with care and support needs which could also lead to savings were identified as: “improved wellbeing, better prevention of care and support need, greater clarity, consistency and equality of access to care and support and reduction of unmet need.”

It will undoubtedly be challenging to implement the provisions of the Care Act and it remains to be seen whether the funding provided will be adequate.

Only time will tell whether the proposed reforms will truly transform the currently outdated adult social care system.

Further reading

The Idox Information Service has a wealth of research reports, articles and case studies on a range of adult social care issues. Items we’ve recently summarised for our database include: